Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Terms and Endearment
Reload this Page >

BA/bmi merger (was Virgin & Balpa - bmi next ?)

Terms and Endearment The forum the bean counters hoped would never happen. Your news on pay, rostering, allowances, extras and negotiations where you work - scheduled, charter or contract.

BA/bmi merger (was Virgin & Balpa - bmi next ?)

Old 2nd Apr 2012, 20:17
  #161 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: England
Posts: 50
...and it is worth noting that TUPE only applies to the new guys. It doesn't protect existing employees in the slightest.
look you is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2012, 20:21
  #162 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 77
Max Nightstop

Can you elaborate on which areas for those not in the know. The DEP contract states seniority position is based on your credited DoJ. I'm not disagreeing with you, I genuinely would like to know. I don't understand your pot shots at those interested in seniority position however, it dictates your quality of life. Ask the guys who've stagnated at the bottom of lists for the past 4 years.
Cattivo is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2012, 21:19
  #163 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: England
Posts: 50
Cattivo,

I think different contracts have existed in the past and there are anomalies that exist for a number of reasons. If you ever see an MSL with DoJs on it, you'll see what I mean. It is no big deal, and all above board. It is possible that bmi pilots may end up at the bottom of the MSL, way above my pay grade, but their DoJ will remain their bmi, or indeed BMED DoJ.

The point about seniority numbers is that your actual number isn't terribly relevant. What counts is where you are relative to other people, how quickly that position changes and what it actually gives you.

For instance, would you rather be 50 out of 100, or 80 out of 200?

What about if the role of preference for you was at 30 in both airlines? Or you moved up 10 places a year in one and only 2 in the other? Then which would you choose? Your actual number means very little.

If a solution was found that increased your number by 50 places (ie
Downwards), but left you in the same, or higher, position as a percentage of the whole and moved you a few years closer to your goal, wouldn't that be a good thing? Where would it sit on the 'disadvantage' test?

Merging bmi's operation into BA, adjusting fleet profile and route network will adjust all the variables. There is so much more to look at than 'what number am I?"

Stagnation is a terrible situation for seniority based systems, with the retirement changes and lack of expansion it has affected several airlines badly. This merger, combined with the impending easing of the retirement bubble, should ease both of those stagnators.
look you is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2012, 21:19
  #164 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Courchevel
Posts: 814
There are complicated employment laws which need to be adhered to. As the companies are being merged together, the law requires the employees DoJ their original company to be respected as continuous service. Just like if BA merged into the Iberia pilot seniority list. They wouldn't expect to be shoved at the bottom like the BACC are planning here would they!?

When Bmed was merged with BMI the lists were merged together on DoJ with BALPA's direction.
Count von Altibar is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2012, 21:42
  #165 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: South East
Posts: 184
Count, you can keep banging your drum over and over again but the reality of the situation is this is a BA/BMI integration. It has nothing to do with BMED/Iberia or any other merger that has gone before.

But you are correct on two counts: the law will be adhered to, BMI DOJ will be respected.

The BMI guys (whom I welcome wholeheartedly ), will take their place at the bottom of the MSL. Their only choice is whether they do this 'with benefits' or without.

There will be no legal challenge!

Happy to re-visit this thread in a couple of weeks.
Super Stall is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2012, 21:51
  #166 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: south east UK
Posts: 375
There are complicated employment laws which need to be adhered to
correct, and most of the posts on here indicate a complete lack of understanding of what those laws are. Also most people also don't seem to understand that these issues are not black and white either.

As the companies are being merged together
nope, they aren't. The parent company of one company is buying the other company who would otherwise go bust within the month.

the law requires the employees DoJ their original company to be respected as continuous service.
it probably does require that, and if it does I'm sure it will be respected where it needs to be, for statutary issues such as pensions, maternity, redundancy etc.

the rest of the stuff such as Seniority lists, contractural t's and c's, salary scales have nothing to do with DoJ and will be negotiated by both CC's.
757_Driver is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2012, 21:52
  #167 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Courchevel
Posts: 814
No legal challenge, that's funny because it's ready to go at the sniff of ignorance to current employment laws which in recent years have changed significantly. Maybe you're not that up to date with what's come into force?

Anyhow, I'm not aware of union company councils making the contracts, that's what the BACC lead you to believe pre the 31st Jan vote. It'll be BA that'll be writing the music, not the union.

Whether the company would have gone bust or not and the timescale is no more relevant than the average daily maximum temperature in the Pitcairn Islands. Off to watch Newsnight, it's more interesting...
Count von Altibar is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2012, 22:27
  #168 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 93
Count

The BA cc didn't lead us to believe anything back in January.
As I have mentioned to you previously, and you have chosen to ignore, the 10m savings pa given by BA pilots to make the takeover viable are subject to the BAcc being satisfied with the arrangements regarding seniority.

Do you think that we would have simply just taken a chance on it?

As Paxman might say, please answer the question.
Nevermind is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2012, 22:27
  #169 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: s england
Posts: 192
Count you've yet to justify leapfrogging an ex bmi pilot who has an earlier DOJ bmi than you but a later DOJ BA.
How many pilots have left bmi to join BA at significant personal cost?
You cant compare Bmed/ bmi with bmi/ BA simply because it's not fair for a bmi pilot with a doj Pre 1989 taking an A380 command.
When you can justify this on this forum I may believe you can justify it in court.
If BA give you seniority on DOJ would they not also have to give you the comensurate payscale. Can you have number 100 on the list on less basic pay than number 101? I reckon this is what BA will think and will do everything to avoid it by finding an alternative solution.

Peculiarly by a strange quirk of fate the advantages to me of DOJ seniority v bottom of the MSL outweigh the disadvantages but I support what is fair.
sudden twang is offline  
Old 3rd Apr 2012, 00:17
  #170 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: LHR
Posts: 90
No legal challenge, that's funny because it's ready to go at the sniff of ignorance to current employment laws which in recent years have changed significantly.
If you think that 1) BA will endorse a solution that leaves them open to legal challenge and/or 2) that you/BMI pilots/BMI-CC have the financial resources to take them on even if they did, you're being a bit naive in my opinion.

Just like if BA merged into the Iberia pilot seniority list. They wouldn't expect to be shoved at the bottom like the BACC are planning here would they!?
If Iberia bought BA, and SEPLA wanted to stick me at the bottom of the Iberia MSL but offered me protections to maintain my current career prospects, I wouldn't have a problem with that. In fact, if BA was on the brink of bankruptcy and Iberia was merely interested in slots at LHR, I'd be delighted with that outcome.

Last edited by BusDriverLHR; 3rd Apr 2012 at 00:49.
BusDriverLHR is offline  
Old 3rd Apr 2012, 01:11
  #171 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Courchevel
Posts: 814
Sudden twang. It is also irrelevant that somebody left BMI to join BA a few years ago and now might be 'leapfrogged' on the list. You pays your money and takes your choice as they say. It's not fair by any shape or means but with respect to IFALPA guidelines on seniority lists and mergers it doesn't bode well for them. I see where you're coming from, I had BMED pilots leapfrog me when BMI bought their operation which was also on the verge of bankruptcy. It initially makes you feel hard done by but with thought, I could come to terms with the collective benefit.

Reference Iberia and a potential bankrupt BA merger. It's also irrelevant the financial state of BA in this hypothetical situation with respect to the seniority outcome of the merged lists. You wouldn't be put at the bottom of the list just to be a grateful pilot to have a job. It's the law folks, if you'd bought BMI for 1 after it become insolvent it would be different. Times have changed since the Dan Air debacle, you must learn to adapt.

You will benefit in terms of shortened time to command, increased prosperity for the company in turn leading to better job security and a share in the fiscal dividends. Why the draconian attempt at a one-sided pre-nuptial? It's doomed to fail. As I've mentioned before, the man that uttered the phrase 'no BA pilot will be disadvantaged' wasn't thinking straight. It's simply not possible with the merger of airline seniority lists.
Count von Altibar is offline  
Old 3rd Apr 2012, 02:15
  #172 (permalink)  
moo
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: uk
Posts: 267
and so what then, Count, if bmi pilots are zipped into the BA seniority list would THEY be sacrificing? Bearing in mind they would therefore be joining a solvent company with decent prospects, full staff travel with original DOJ, protected pay, commands, private healthcare, access to 747/777/A380/787, one of the largest and most diverse route networks of any airline, a bidding system that affords amazing life control, an increasing payscale, an LHR base, a market leading pension scheme, a bonus scheme that pays out, a pilot only share reward scheme, an electronic rostering system that allows trip swaps, sector swaps, trips to be dropped, overtime to be picked up with the click of a mouse, etc etc etc

In fact, would there be any sacrifice at all on the part of the BMI pilots? The BA pilots are 10 million down.

It's just that if the above were the case, you would be having penny and the bun, and bizarrely, that doesn't sit too well with around 3300 people.
moo is offline  
Old 3rd Apr 2012, 06:07
  #173 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: uk
Posts: 490
Seems to be a bit of thread creep here !

However, I am curious as to what is being offered to the BM pilots.
Can anyone who actually knows post it here? Not just the headlines the details.
ie When will the 10-15 year F/Os get commands?
How will their short haul bidding be protected ?
Where will they fit in to bid line?
Where will they join the pay scale and how do they progress up the pay scale?
Will BMI captains and F/Os continue to fly long haul as they do at present?
If the A330 fleet is retired and replaced by another type will BM pilots retrain on to the new type
Will BM pilots be paid as medium haul pilots?
Will they retain the 56 max 28 min days roster notice?
Will they still get leave based on length of seniority?
Will they still know their leave for Xmas in May?

In fact has anything at all been offered or is it just floating ideas at this stage with nothing solid on offer?

Back to the tread, should BALPA change its name to clearly reflect the pilot groups it represents and distance itself from the letters BA...
bad bear is offline  
Old 3rd Apr 2012, 06:19
  #174 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Camp X-Ray
Posts: 2,135
As I've said to the Count a number of times, park the Bmi pilots on a standalone sub-fleet and there's no legal challenge. The law is complied with and if they choose to throw their own money down the drain trying to sue BA for something the law doesn't entitle them to more fools them.
Hand Solo is offline  
Old 3rd Apr 2012, 08:13
  #175 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: s england
Posts: 192
Count,
Yep they paid their money and made a choice as you say.
Have a quick perusal of the transcript of BASSA v BA and rethink the ex bmi guys being irrelevant all sorts of factors came out.

It's time to pay YOUR money and take your choice again then to verbalise that stance to BA. All the information , advice , advatages and risks are on here for you to do that.
sudden twang is offline  
Old 3rd Apr 2012, 08:59
  #176 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: UK
Age: 72
Posts: 615
Hand Solo

The danger of a standalone sub-fleet is that IAG might decide to form a standalone airline ( "British Airways Express" ?). Being on a lower cost base they would then only recruit into this new airline and gradually transfer routes to it.
IAG would then have two disparate groups of pilots that they could play off against each other. Allowing the Bmi pilots onto the MSL with a fair, negotiated, agreement between the two pilot groups would give you a much stronger position in any future disputes with IAG. To force the Bmi pilots to join at the bottom would cause years of resentment and infighting which would play into the hands of the IAG beancounters.
Airclues is online now  
Old 3rd Apr 2012, 09:06
  #177 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: south england
Posts: 395
one lot without hats maybe?
gatbusdriver is offline  
Old 3rd Apr 2012, 09:09
  #178 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Camp X-Ray
Posts: 2,135
The IAG/BA-light decision has already been taken. It wasn't the BACC who lobbied IAG to integrate bmi, it was BA. The BACCs concessions merely helped BA win the argument at IAG board level. BA management don't want a cuckoo in the nest either. To force the BA-light option back on to the table the bmi employees would have to convince IAG they had a better business plan than BA! Bmi will be integrated into BA. All that's up for discussion is the degree if integration, or not, of the Bmi pilots into the BA MSL. The Bmi integration can take place, delivering all the benefits to BA, without ever integrating the Bmi pilots. Non-integration of pilots is the cheapest and preferred option for BA. The Bmi CC can work with the BACC to drive for integration or they can carry on kidding themselves that they'll be able to negotiate anything other than a bare bones TUPE from BA, with disastrous consequences for any Bmi FO with command aspirations.
Hand Solo is offline  
Old 3rd Apr 2012, 09:15
  #179 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: everywhere
Posts: 127
So you freely admit that if bmi pilots don't do it your way they will be prejudiced in any merger scenario?
xwindflirt is offline  
Old 3rd Apr 2012, 09:31
  #180 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Camp X-Ray
Posts: 2,135
No. They'll keep what they have now, which is precisely what TUPE requires. TUPE doesnt protect widebody fkying or command aspirations.

There are too many people here who don't know where the battle lines have been drawn. There are also too many people who haven't realised what a precarious position bmi and its staff are in, how little protection the law will provide them, and how determined BA are to stick to their promise that bmi's cost base will not rise post-merger. They need to either get with the program and pursue economies of scale, or stand alone and be exposed to BA's cost-cutting zeal.
Hand Solo is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.